If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ. You'll find answers to the frequently asked questions as well as basic rules. No need to register unless you would like to participate, although some images will only show if you are registered/logged-in.

You will need to register
before you can post: click the red register link or the register tab, above, right.

The WoodenBoat Forum is sponsored by WoodenBoat Publications, publisher of WoodenBoat magazine since 1974. To get WoodenBoat delivered to your door or computer, mobile device of choice, etc, click WB Subscriptions.

Selling/self promotion postings are verboten on the Forum. To advertise, take a look at WoodenBoat Advertising, or use your Google Adwords account if you want to advertise on the Forum.

Re: The Failing NY Times

Originally Posted by gypsie

This continues to fascinate me - how hard line right supporters see the same thing so diametrically differently. Infact you could say, they seem to see things completely upside down.
The only difference is when the right wing try to explain themselves, they get lost down rabbit holes of digression and conflation.

I feel there's something in this 'blind spot for observable facts' that is at the essence of why people are conservative.
Is it a fear of change - really deep rooted terror of anything different (muslims, people of colour, healthcare)?
It sometimes appears to be an intolerance for complex ideas that can't be summed up in a catch phrase - coupled with a deep distrust of anyone who does seem to be able to grasp them (must be a conspiracy between all of the major scientific bodies in the world, and China).
Is it a world view that says our world is the centre of the Universe and we are the summit - and then a complete inability to reconcile facts with lived experience (conflation and digression)?

Thing is, to master scientific inquiry, physics or evolution(!) takes years of hard work and study. But you can explain the basic story of any of the worlds religions within the attention span of most people - say 30 mins. To me that seems to be about having the intellectual maturity to see things, or discover things, as they demonstrably are, over how we would wish they were.
Conservatives seem to aspire to a world they wished they could have, rather than one that is achievable. Which is a twist, because Conservatives always think of themselves as the sensible ones.

Re: The Failing NY Times

Originally Posted by oznabrag

If I am so wrong, you have an intellectual duty to deconstruct my assertion point by point.

You can't, so you shirk your duty and fling poo.

Hear, hear. A moral duty too.

He's a Mexican. -- Donald Trump.
America cannot survive another four years of Barack Obama. -- Governor Chris Christie (R) New Jersey
It wasn't racism, it was an attack on Christianity. -- Fox News
This week, it is Robert E. Lee and this week, Stonewall Jackson. Is it George Washington next? You have to ask yourself, where does it stop?

Re: The Failing NY Times

Originally Posted by TomF

That's a very interesting paper, which raises some interesting follow-up questions.

You certainly have.

A lifetime of experience tends to make one's opinions become more concrete, as you've examined various alternatives and found them unsustainable. And that it's this solidifying of opinions, this reduced willingness to yet again consider a new shiny alternative when all the previous ones have fallen short ... which is expressed in conservatism.

That kind of seems like tweaking the definition to support the argument. Conservatism doesn't have to mean irrational opposition to new opinions. It doesn't need to have anything to do with opinions. It has to do with policy decisions. In that context, other things being equal, the old is known and the new isn't, and therefore carries more weight. That isn't prejudice, it's the nature of things.

He's a Mexican. -- Donald Trump.
America cannot survive another four years of Barack Obama. -- Governor Chris Christie (R) New Jersey
It wasn't racism, it was an attack on Christianity. -- Fox News
This week, it is Robert E. Lee and this week, Stonewall Jackson. Is it George Washington next? You have to ask yourself, where does it stop?

Re: The Failing NY Times

If it turns out that age-related political conservatism is a product of normal age-related structure changes in the brain (note the "if" there, please!), should this shift in anterior cingulate cortex / right amygdala sizes be understood to be adaptive? Is there an evolutionary benefit to being more "Liberal" in youth, and more "Conservative" with age?

Or is the evolutionary benefit actually simply in being "Liberal" in youth, and Nature doesn't much care if it all turns to oatmeal once we're beyond our childbearing years?

If I use the word "God," I sure don't mean an old man in the sky who just loves the occasional goat sacrifice. - Anne Lamott

Re: The Failing NY Times

Originally Posted by Osborne Russell

You certainly have.

That kind of seems like tweaking the definition to support the argument. Conservatism doesn't have to mean irrational opposition to new opinions. It doesn't need to have anything to do with opinions. It has to do with policy decisions. In that context, other things being equal, the old is known and the new isn't, and therefore carries more weight. That isn't prejudice, it's the nature of things.

Ever tried to make a policy decision without opinions?

Originally Posted by TomF

If it turns out that age-related political conservatism is a product of normal age-related structure changes in the brain (note the "if" there, please!), should this shift in anterior cingulate cortex / right amygdala sizes be understood to be adaptive? Is there an evolutionary benefit to being more "Liberal" in youth, and more "Conservative" with age?

Or is the evolutionary benefit actually simply in being "Liberal" in youth, and Nature doesn't much care if it all turns to oatmeal once we're beyond our childbearing years?

Git'em Tom!

Originally Posted by John of Phoenix

Moral duty, ok, well, never mind.

LMAO

Uh, yeah. Moral duty.

If one approaches these questions in an amoral fashion, one ends up electing Donald Trump.

I'd be inclined to ascribe any age-associated shift toward Type1 to two factors. First - we do accrue more experience, and naturally become attached to our conclusions, and therefore less inclined toward exploring and questioning our assumptions. Second - we get tired, and tend to lean more on the far easier Type1 thinking. It's usually right, after all. And it's too much work to be aware of when a shift to Type2 would be appropriate... not to mention the greater work involved in actually doing Type2 analysis.

Re: The Failing NY Times

Originally Posted by oznabrag

Ever tried to make a policy decision without opinions?

What I'm trying to say is that people are capable of deciding policy, i.e. they are capable of self-government, despite difference of opinions; so that the goal of policy-making is not opinion-changing, at least not primarily.

He's a Mexican. -- Donald Trump.
America cannot survive another four years of Barack Obama. -- Governor Chris Christie (R) New Jersey
It wasn't racism, it was an attack on Christianity. -- Fox News
This week, it is Robert E. Lee and this week, Stonewall Jackson. Is it George Washington next? You have to ask yourself, where does it stop?

I'd be inclined to ascribe any age-associated shift toward Type1 to two factors. First - we do accrue more experience, and naturally become attached to our conclusions, and therefore less inclined toward exploring and questioning our assumptions. Second - we get tired, and tend to lean more on the far easier Type1 thinking. It's usually right, after all. And it's too much work to be aware of when a shift to Type2 would be appropriate... not to mention the greater work involved in actually doing Type2 analysis.

Third, when you are old, you have learned that most of the stuff young people think is new, isn't; and much of what they think is outmoded is more pertinent than ever. Experience, learning, and perspective take time even when you put in the effort.

He's a Mexican. -- Donald Trump.
America cannot survive another four years of Barack Obama. -- Governor Chris Christie (R) New Jersey
It wasn't racism, it was an attack on Christianity. -- Fox News
This week, it is Robert E. Lee and this week, Stonewall Jackson. Is it George Washington next? You have to ask yourself, where does it stop?

Re: The Failing NY Times

Originally Posted by Osborne Russell

What I'm trying to say is that people are capable of deciding policy, i.e. they are capable of self-government, despite difference of opinions; so that the goal of policy-making is not opinion-changing, at least not primarily.

Re: The Failing NY Times

Originally Posted by Hugh Conway

That storys over 3 weeks old! Why did you bump this thread with it?

.

Advertising sales execs at the New York Times were in a tizzy on Wednesday after a fresh round of layoffs decimated the ad sales director role, The Post has learned.Out of a 15-person department, at least 10 ad sales directors were let go, sources said.The Times confirmed that there had been some layoffs but did not comment on the number of jobs eliminated.“This was a limited and targeted action, tied to a new strategy for 2018 that intends to bring the sales leadership team as close to our clients as possible,” a spokeswoman said. “As a result, we’re also adding new positions.”The news comes after the Gray Lady has endured another tough year in advertising sales — and as it looks to expand digital sales to counterbalance shriveling print sales.Last month, New York Times Co. Chief Executive Mark Thompson said the Times expects high single-digit declines in total advertising revenues for the fourth quarter.In order to jump-start the ad sales team, Thompson promoted Sebastian Tomich, a young, hard-charging advertising and sales chief, who reports to Meredith Kopit Levien, the company’s executive vice president and chief operating officer.Tomich, who took the reins as head of advertising and marketing solutions two weeks ago, wasted no time cleaning house — informing ad sales directors of their fate via e-mail on Tuesday, in what was just his second e-mail to his staff.The first e-mail was an introductory message.The laid-off staffers have been encouraged to apply for a limited number of open sales jobs

Re: The Failing NY Times

Technology is wreaking havoc in newsprint industries, I experienced the beginning of it myself when hot metal type gave way to computers. The writing was on the wall then and continues apace. Where it will end up no one knows yet as the technology development tends to consume it's predecessor at an ever increasing rate. One of our major news organisations is recutting its jib, trimming its current presence in the media scene and redeploying the staff and resources to a new investigative reporting department.

Re: The Failing NY Times

I have a paid subscription to many of the failing and fake news sources - The NY Times, The Washington Post, The Atlantic, The Christian Science Monitor, and read some others - The LA Times, The Guardian, Esquire.

alvin is once again lying to himself if he thinks these are going to give way to the lying rags he reads.

"Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast." - Alice

Re: The Failing NY Times

Re: The Failing NY Times

I subscribe to the NYT and read it every morning. The notion that it prints the Truth, or that it is "objective" is, however, is silly. Depending on the subject, its slant goes from modest to severe. Of course it's head and shoulders above the Trump cheerleading rags, and it seldom makes stuff up.

Re: The Failing NY Times

Thomas edsall in the nyt writes pieces after interviewing researchers, eggheads. Seems the trump phenomenon was caused by us coastal, NE elites smugly looking down on the great heartland relentlessly making laws that threaten their way of life. Wedding cakes for gays as an example. Their hatred and narrow mindedness is our fault. Well, I’ll admit, we did tell them they couldn’t hang black men from street lights.....there was that.....oh....and letting decorated black vets vote. Guess we did do that. Maybe Edsalls eggheads are right.